ExtremeTech explains: What is DirectX 12?

It’s been over 18 months since we first visited the topic of DirectX 12 and what features and benefits it would bring to modern gaming. Much has happened since. Windows 10‘s launch and the debut of Ashes of the Singularity brought the first hints of DirectX 12 gaming performance, as did Fable Legends, which debuted some weeks later. We’ve also covered the work being done on Vulkan, the open-source, Linux-friendly DX12 competitor (now not expected to debut until 2016), how that software might impact the future of Valve and the company’s push for its own SteamOS, and the debut of DirectX 12 on the Xbox One as well.

Enter DX12

Microsoft and Nvidia first took the lid of DirectX 12 at GDC 2014. The new API promised to deliver the same low-overhead benefits of AMD’s custom Mantle UI, along with vastly improved performance and superior hardware utilization compared with DirectX 11. Even better, DirectX 12 (and D3D 12) are backwards compatible with virtually every single GPU from the GTX 400 to the present day. At present, only Nvidia’s Kepler and Maxwell cards are DX12 compatible, but the company has promised that Fermi compatibility is coming in a future update.

Microsoft has published a blog post and accompanying API samples that illustrate how much more powerful the software is, while acknowledging some of the flaws in the DirectX 11 API. One of the central problems with DX11 is that it’s virtually impossible to multi-thread the 3D rendering path. Game rendering ends up running almost entirely on a single CPU thread, bogging down the rest of the system. DirectX 11 also makes certain assumptions about the underlying hardware that have proven to map poorly to GPUs from both AMD and Nvidia.

Here’s a threading comparison between DX11 (top) and DX12 (bottom):

See how, in DX11, the entire workload is hanging on a single thread with extremely low utilization on the other threads? That’s a problem — with the kernel-mode driver running on the same thread as the game and the D3D layer, there’s just not much for the other threads to do. The second graph shows how, by splitting the workload more evenly, the game can hit much lower latencies. Better latencies translates directly into higher frame rates.

3DMark – DX11

3DMark – DX12

This pair of screenshots from 3DMark 2012 further illustrate the difference. Total CPU time is dramatically reduced in DX12 by efficiently reallocating data across all cores.

OS and GPU support

DirectX 12 is currently supported on all Nvidia GPUs based on Kepler and Maxwell. That’s the vast majority of the 6xx series and all of the 7xx and 8xx graphics cards. Fermi support is coming soon, which will extend support all the way back to the 400 and 500-series as well.

AMD supports DirectX 12 on all GCN-class hardware dating back to the launch of that family in 2012. All AMD GPUs from the HD 77xx family (or above), the HD 85xx family (or above), and the Radeon R5 family (or above) all support DirectX 12. This includes the various iterations of GCN, from 1.0 – 1.2.

One thing to understand is that while DirectX 12 is a common API, that API has different optional features, defined as feature levels. AMD’s first-generation GCN products support DirectX 12 at the 11_1 feature level , as do Nvidia’s Fermi and Kepler cards. Cards based on Hawaii, Tonga, and Fiji support the 12_0 feature level. More information on this, and a comprehensive comparison between AMD, Nvidia, and Intel, can be found here.

Windows 10 is the only operating system that supports DirectX 12, which means if you want in on these features you’ll need to take advantage of Microsoft’s free upgrade (or buy a new PC with W10 preloaded).

How’s performance?

There are several facets to DirectX 12 performance, and the benchmarks themselves are very early. As our Ashes and Fable Legends previews demonstrated, AMD gains some ground on its rival in DirectX 12. The gap isn’t enormous, and it varies depending on which cards you compare. The GTX 980 Ti still wins Fable Legends overall, though the Fury X closes that gap in Ashes of the Singularity. Overall, it’s too early to draw conclusions.

If you’re trying to suss out what GPU to buy, my answer is this: With both AMD and Nvidia set to introduce cards based on 14/16nm technology within the next 6-9 months, it’s probably best to wait and see what each company brings to the table. If you have to buy a GPU today, you can expect good DX12 performance from either vendor. The relative difference between the two hasn’t yet been shown to be large enough to justify fans of one company or the other jumping ship. If the early trends hold, DX12 is a bit better for current AMD cards than it is for Nvidia, but I’m not ready to commit to that as fact.

Based on what we’ve seen so far, DirectX 12 won’t automatically deliver higher frame rates as if by magic. Its value is in the way it loosens the stranglehold on multi-threaded CPUs, giving developers the option to use rendering techniques that take advantage of this new ability. We’ve also seen the option to run GPUs from two different vendors in the same PC, and there’s reason to think DX12 could indirectly improve AI calculations as well.

Check out our ExtremeTech Explains series for more in-depth coverage of today’s hottest tech topics.

Nice, so basically I’ll get a speed boost for nothing when DX12 is out. Can’t argue with that!

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Yup! Sure seems that way.

Kind of shows you what a bit of competition (from Mantle) can do, though. No competition = you rest on your laurels and ship a sub-par product. Competition = You get off your ass and spend an appropriate amount of dev time on something.

Mayoo

It also shows that bigger hardware isn’t always the best option. Optimizing the usage is everything.

Gas mileage over bigger gas tank anytime! Yeah I’m looking at you all “omg the Nexus 5 has a tiny battery” talkers.

Guest

Well according to some nVidia reps, they had their team working with Microsoft for 4 years to bring DX12 to alpha. These kinds of software packages take a very long time to build, you know.

These are elite people working at Microsoft, morality aside. They’re a hell of a lot more proactive than the average person. If it took them this long to have DX12 ready, I would guess it’s because they held off on releasing it until they were pressured, and not because it wasn’t generally finished.

You have to pace your releases so that you always have the next incremental/revolutionary thing ready in case someone is about to one-up you.

Scali

Indeed. A new DirectX is generally paired with a new release of Windows, and usually also around the same time as new GPU architectures come to market, so that major new features can be supported (such as geometry shaders in D3D10 or tessellation and compute shaders in D3D11).
I would suspect that the release of DX12 is at the end of 2015, because nVidia and/or AMD probably have some GPU updates ready as well by that time. Most probably the shader language will be extended further (SM6.0). And who knows what else.
That has always been the pattern.

Winston Smith

WRONG! The best thing 2 do would be make a law which says u have 2 make the fastest driver in the world. DONE. No competition needed. Jeeez some people.

fsdfsdsdfsd

Laws are not to be followed, laws are to laugh at.

Singh1699

Speed boost is worthless if people have already jumped off buildings due to windows 8.

Guest

What a drama queen.

Max

Have you seen the Windows 8 numbers? Its killing off the Laptop and desktop industry!

Dozerman

If only Linux were ready for primetime…

Xplorer4x4

Yep, the numbers weren’t on the decline prior to Win 8./sarcasm

java lu

Using windows 8 right now. Seems just like windows 7 but faster and never crashed one me.

Phil Roberts

lmao this sounds like the old vista and seven argument all over again. seven is vista with all the bloat ware taken out so it seemed like it ran faster when the truth is it was not noticeable. I ran vista for quite a while and had no speed issues or crashes as most seven people was saying, I say its more user error than OS error. windows 8 is a mobile and tablet OS people don’t want that app on their laptop or desktop as the figures show seven = 50.55% in use while 8 shows 21% shipping 8 with new laptops and desktops is killing of the PC because people don’t like it or want it. this I a classic case of M$ trying to make money out of an app they released on other platforms and thought it would make even more on the PC. there is no major difference between seven and 8 apart from the live tiles and the way the desktop runs and as for speed they are both the same for apps and for games. I have a desktop with seven on it and one with 8 on it and they both run games and apps at the same speed. both systems are identical apart from a few apps installed. the only reason I went from vista to seven was because my new build has sata III and vista don’t support it which is down to M$ not supporting vista any more as they want everyone to switch to seven at the time same with seven v 8. wait for the new OS and M$ will stop supporting seven so people will upgrade to the new OS when it arrives.

But they have not been any decent PC Games worth buying since Direct X 8.0, and only a handful of playable Direct X 9c games since… so whats is the point? seems Microsoft can see where the wind is blowing lol

Justin Downer

what? Are you stating there’s no PC games worth buying?

James Tolson

no not exactly lol, the are a huge library of excellent pc games out there, however most of them require either direct X 3 to 6, 7 or 8, and a few 9.. my point is tho in recent years most games have not been pc exclusives, so gone are the good strategy and simulation games us pc gamers loved bah few and since say mid 2000’s are the shoddy console ports of dumb FPS games and dumbed down Role playing games instead.. and not many games yet require direct X 10 plus to run anyway which is the other part of my point.. i have 1 thats it sword of the stars 2, which i cannot play now anyway as i deleted my windows 7 partition over a year ago as i don’t use it (i like windows xp) the whole games industry is heading for one big crash if you ask me :-)

Barry Ferguson

Stagnant, yes, but crashing? I have a hard time seeing that.

qiplayer

Every one of the 1400 hours I played crysis2 multiplayer was worth. Get this game and come online :D

Joel Hruska

“and only a handful of playable Direct X 9c games since…”

Yes. God, how could we have been so blind?

Half Life 2
Dragon Age
KOTOR.
The entire Arkham franchise.
Prototype
Mass Effect
World of Warcraft
South Park: Stick of Truth
The entire Battlefield franchise
Portal
Starcraft 2
The BioShock series
The Witcher
Xcom: Enemy Unknown
Left 4 Dead

And so, so many more.

God, everyone should just quit and go home.

Dozerman

Ha ha ha ha. That has to be the most trollish comment i’ve heard from an author in awhile. “Liked”

Joel Hruska

I literally rolled through my Steam library and tossed in a few personal favorites. :P

Dozerman

Sometimes, you just gotta go all-out.

James Tolson

my steam library looks similar lol..

i stand by my opinion tho, even tho i see where you are coming from, please read the reply i made to justin above :-)

few of the games you mentioned are console ports..

half life 2 runs on the source engine and is direct x 8 compatible so that includes portal and left for dead although, even tho i have played though half life 2 (when it was released) to me it was never as good as half life..

bioshock again its an ok game i only ever finished bioshock 1, but to me it was never as good as either system shock (dos) or system shock 2.. the story was ok but the gameplay mechanic was ripped from sshock2..

Xcom, again i played and finished, it was an ok nod to the franchise, but not a patch on the original UFO enemy unknown, this is a good example of modern games been dumbed down for console audiences, it just shows what pc gamers expected from a game back in the day,

battlefield franchise, i have not played.. but i do understand it has a huge fan base and is not as dumb as some of its other online rivals (aka COD ) lol, so ill give u that one, but like i said “handfull of of playable dx 9 games”

WOW – lol no way, that game is for degenerates with no life, seriously i don’t know how anybody could put any time into that game.. i used to play eve online and that took up too much time so i quit.. many many moons ago.. sorry no offense to any wow players :-)

i know progress has to made in the underlining technology of API’s but there has to be games and good ones for us pc gamers to play.. and we are not seeing that trend, developers are either going bust, giving up or being bought out by publishers.. publishers are turning whats left into sweat shops churning out the next DRM/DLC micro transaction filled crap call of duty clones or call of duty itself lol, and they are aimed at consoles with pc’s ports as an afterthought.. not many original pc games are left.. and the franchises that are born on the pc are locked up in rights between defunct developers and since bought out publishers (homeworld franchise for eg).. this is turning into an essay lol sorry ill shut up now :-(

Sikobae TheXenodragon

Left 4 Dead is not DX8 compatible. Anything older than a GeForce 6 series will nail you an unplayable black screen.

Phil Roberts

I agree most or all games released now are aimed at consoles. there are not many games that the real hardcore pc gamer to play. RTS and Sim games if released are dumbed down to be ported onto the console. I see battlefield mentioned sorry to say but the 1st BF game was pc exclusive then when they went to BF2 BF3 BF4 they are all console based fps games. even if you own a high end pc these days and you know for a fact that the setup you own can produce far better gfx and physyx than the ps4 and xbone but yet the newer games released onto pc and the consoles there is no major difference in gfx hence titanfall fifa BF4. the game companies now are producing for consoles 1st then doing cheap ports to the pc only because they are getting handouts from sony and M$ to do so which is why sometimes you will see the same game on all 3 platforms but it will look and play better on either PS or Xbox simply because Sony or M$ has injected a good amount of money into that company.

Mirimon

kotor, as neat as the story was, was a mess.

mass effect-same as kotor, delayed rendering, bugs, too limiting.

WoW, launched well… turned to crap a few years later….

South park.. though fun, about 40 hours too short for an RPG, and BUGS.. oh man…

BF franchise.. lets be honest, if you ever played 1942, much of the rest of the franchise was not up to snuff…..

SC2… gross…. and being sold piecemeal.. it’s nearly as bad as D3…

anyways.. your list, and anything else you can think of, only serves to bolster the previous statement, as there were far more bad games made than good, FAR more……
and a great chunk of what you have was on DX8

Joel Hruska

KOTOR was brilliant. No problems with ME. WoW got better steadily through at least WotLK (when I stopped playing), South Park: Stick of Truth had no game-breaking bugs for me, save for a bit of trouble with characters disappearing during cut scenes (beat the whole game). I’ve enjoyed every game in the BF4 family, Starcraft 2 has been well-paced and very detailed. Very pleased with it.

Finally, nothing I named was DX8. Some games *ran* in DX8, but every game I listed was DX9 or higher.

Mirimon

you sir, need to get a lotto ticket, asap…
kotor and ME (in fact.. most of the halo games… and pretty much anything being ported from the xbox platforms) all suffered from delayed progressive rendering issues, specifically in the cut scenes…. as for southpark, I loved it, but it was rife with game braking bugs, several people get stopped somewhere in the game where a certain cutscene is supposed to take place and unlock something, but bugs out and doesn’t, thus halting the very linear progression (current work around is to manually save progress to different slots, do not use the autosave..)
after playing 1942, you honestly enjoyed the bad company labels? or the first modern bf to hit consoles? which made the whole thing feel very lethargic? nah, I can’t believe that.. 1942+mods, vietnam, BF3 (and BF4, it’s good, the only bad with it really is the playerbase..).. the others made me simply go back to playing 1942.. and even 43′ and 2142..
SC2.. well paced? last time all you had to do was buy the game.. the whole story was there.. you didn’t have to buy a trilogy to feel complete….. and that was the point.. almost as bad as LOTR being made in only 3 films, despite it really needing ~18 films… and somehow the Hobbit becoming a trilogy….

as for which version of D3D.. that was the point.. you listed dx9 (and 8 capable) titles… many many more of the better ones don’t use it, but also, those titles only make up a small fraction of the library for the period…. shovelware was abound.

Joel Hruska

I beat Stick of Truth, no problems. Progressive rendering (the texture pop-in) didn’t bother me. And each SC2 game has come packed with 20 or so missions compared to 30 in the original. By the time the series is over, SC 2 will be 2x as long as the original.

Mirimon

the number of “missions” are high, but extremely short.. and honestly, not difficult enough (but that’s just opinion anyways.. we both know games have gotten more… “easier”.. more.. “everybody gets a trophy”-like…).. in fact.. all of the new SC games have taken less than half the time to go through the campaign vs the original, and even against broodwar…, less than half the time… only took me 11 hours on the initial SCII trilogy, which convinced me not to buy them again until they are about 75% cheaper and bundled together.

I’m glad you had no issue with SoT, the majority had them though, many have come back to my store wanting to return it for that reason (I told them the work around, few honestly went ahead with a refund after that). But it’s length is definitely questionable.

In fact.. it would seem the overall amount of playtime for completion of the recent games has decreased… which makes sense if they are not going to raise the price of games (as is usual when transitioning to another generation of consoles) that money has to be managed somewhere.. so in spite of having more storage on our current formats, more capability, many developers/publishers will produce game that are simply shorter and require less development.

Joel Hruska

Quite the opposite. The problem is that game development costs have exploded due to increased eye candy, while game prices have not gone up. Adjusted for inflation, games have never been cheaper. That hurts bottom lines.

Mirimon

that’s just it.. look at the average game time from last gen, and the gen before it… usually we see a price increase, this time it remains but we get less game overall. Titanfall is a prime example, it screams for a real campaign mode, and yet, for the half game it is, the price is the same as a complete title (to be fair, xbox users of last gen are familiar with incredibly short games and wouldn’t know better, due to hardware capability and mostly due to physical media storage limits.

Game prices have come *down* since 2000. Down, even as price to develop explodes upwards. And what drives the price of games? Art. Art and resource creation.

And *stories* — big, convoluted stories — require art. New art. Because you’ll notice if the dungeon is the same dungeon or if there are four enemy models. So if art costs drive story and story requirements drive the need for more art, then art and story are linked.

Games that cost $60 in 2000 really ought to cost $80 in 2014 just to keep the price the *same.* But they don’t. They still cost $59.99. Margins have crumbled in the industry as a result.

Mirimon

I would have to say mass marketing, over-budget commercials, hiring top of the line silver screen actors and other such concepts to hype and ride on associated fame cost game production dearly as well. I’m fond of games that are fun, and visually pleasing that also didn’t take a massive team or massive budget to produce. It still stands to reason though, rather than raise prices, simply reduce end game production. It’s like car sales.. you really aren’t getting a discount, or a bonus bit of pocket change, the cost simply shifts, often in an obscure or indirect manner. TBH.. I could handle an $80 game, as long as it’s really in the value..like an fps that’s about 10 hours of campaign, and the good old rpg’s that were 100+ hours… though we are far more likely to see games made piece by piece, and sold as such as well, and by the time you have experienced enough of the game to make it seem complete, you will have spent a few hundred dollars…
This is why a more unified development structure is valuable, to reduce time and cost of development while increasing the level of quality in the product.

blueman24

“The entire Battlefield franchise”
Are you serious? Battlefield 4 too? LOL. no pls, just no

Dozerman

What kind of games do you like?

James Tolson

all games from mid 80’s till say mid 2000’s,, the pc gaming platform in my opinion hit its peak in 2003 and declined from 2004 onwards, from 2006 all games have been dumbed down console ports… i like strategy games, i like simulation games (space/flight sims) and i like proper RPG’s with d&D rule sets and role die gameplay mechanic.. for e.g. my favorite elder scrolls games are daggerfall and morrowind.. both fantastic games, but from oblivion to skyrim the games just became dumbed down follow the quest marker adventure/combat type game with hardly no roleplay at all, now sure i played skyrim on my ps3 and i finished it, but it was no elder scrolls game i knew and has no replay value to me whatsoever.. but ill go back to morrowind and i keep replaying it as to me that was the last in its franchise :-)

Joel Hruska

So I’m sympathetic to the way that console control mechanisms can suck when ported to the PC, I really am. The first reason I got into modding for Skyrim was to get rid of the godawful UI.

But I maintain that there have been a great many great games, even in your category. Heck, you’ve got titles like Dwarf Fortress if you want a truly insane experience. I’d mention Fallout 3 and Fallout: NV, but I’m guessing you didn’t like them either.

But this brings up an interesting question: What makes Daggerfall or Morrowind better than Skyrim, to you? Because one of the things I hated in early RPGs was how bland they were. Very few quests. Very little to do.

I loved games like Betrayal At Krondor because they merged a main quest and side quests into an excellent and expansive story, but many games didn’t do that well. You had a meandering sort of main quest in those days, and not much else.

James Tolson

yes Skyrim has a awful Console UI, Less skills, dumb level up, silly same level enemies that stick to same level as yourself, Simple zero depth quests, that funny you don’t even have to read just blindly accepts follow the quest marker retrieve item and go back to the dude that gave u quest to complete (without reading any dialogue lmao).. worst thing tho for me is being able to kill orcs at level 1? and having no diversity in race or skill.. making the game bland.. sure i like the dragons and combat and graphics.. and yes i suppose its a pretty good adventure game but RPG? nope.. in morrowind for e.g dialogue u had to read and there where lots of it.. u may have to find a book from a library to find a location or ask? no quest markers there.. getting stuck is part of the game for me.. and NO FAST TRAVEL lol it ruins it.. yeah stilt striders and caravans but not simply just selecting location on map, it defeats the object.. as for daggerfall, i love the procedurally generated dungeon thing in that game..

i do like the bethesda fallout games, but again i prefer the original isometric games and their humor..

as for classic RPG’s i have played betrayal at krondor, however my favorites where, Dungeon master series, Eye of the beholder series.. and my absolute favorite was the Ishar Trilogy..

im playing through might and magic 10 at the moment, in the forum (where i check for updates on the game and bugs) there are many people complaining about getting stuck on the simplest of puzzles and or quests, what annoys me is that if they put a little time into the game they could easily figure it out for themselves, but i guess the modern teenage gamer don’t like getting stuck and demands bailing out straight away, which to me not only ruins the game experience but defeats the whole point.. sigh :-(

Phobos

That is something I never understood, why are the enemies stick to the same level as you? wasn’t the point to explore because some enemies could be reach until you level up enough to challenge them. Now they change that just got to options and change the difficulty from master to expert and low and behold enemies are a lot more difficult, I feel they cheap out on that one badly. Heck not even Final Fantasy had such thing.

Phobos

For me it has to be 2006 where most games became console ports. My beloved UT3 such hopes I had and they made a mess with it. I think Epic only used it as the poster child for UE3. I never played Dagger Fall or Morrowind, I stared playing it when Oblivion came out and I got say I was very impress, as for Skyrim its a mix bag. I agree the UI is very console like and to my surprise very buggy. In oblivion I hardly encounter any bugs at all. Before the Elder scrolls games I used to play Dungeon Siege I really liked it, DS2 was a bit of meh. As for Bioshock I never played it, though I read it was very good there were rumors it installed a rootkit. For me console ports and DRM made playing on the pc a real pain, not like it used to be.

James Tolson

ahh Dungeon seige, another great example of a franchise destroyed lol, Legends of Arrana was my favourite in the series.. DS2 i did complete but i got a little bored with its story and was too linear in comparison to LOA.. But Dungeon Seige 3? well put it this way after installing the game and playing it for 20 minutes i uninstalled it (its greyed out in my steam library lol) it is THAT BAD.. so bad bad i think its an insult to even most retarded teenage console player.. and the fact they gave the pc the laziest port of the console version possible, bah it beggars belief.. thanks for bringing that one up, i have fond memories ranting in the forums when that one came out lol

Phobos

I actually forgot about DS3, after playing Oblivion I lost interest in other RPGs, then there is Baldur’s Gate another one that I never got the chance to play.

Daniel Shepherd

I don’t really have any hopes for DX12 for windows 7 as they want people to use windows 8. I wouldn’t be surprised if they took the stats for 50% of pc gamers from just the battlefield gamers as it was the recommended OS for BF4. MS tend to make things sound better then what they really are and talk alot of BS to get people to move to a new OS.

carol argo

mm!android?say ty to Microsoft for releasing this in December 2015!plenty of time to fiddle with android ! right? at least now we know why android is number one!

DavidHollinger

So, this is awesome and all good to hear,
but why is there no news on the Announcement/Presentation from Nvidia,
AMD and Intel about how OpenGL has a 7x-15x better performance ratio
than DirectX.

All 3 GPU manufacturers touting OpenGL as better than DirectX and no one is listening, wierd…..

Dozerman

Where are you getting these numbers from? Steam mentioned that OGL was about 30 percent faster in their implementation, but never that it is 7 to 15 percent faster.

This was presented at GDC by 2 Nvidia Guys, 1 AMD Guy and 1 Intel Guy (Names in the title slide)

Joel Hruska

Because I just heard about it from this comment. I’ve reached out. Story soon.

Dozerman

They seem to be referring to driver overhead as opposed to total performance, but the article is worded pretty tricky. The fourth paragraph is the most telling:

“AMD’s Graham Sellers, Intel’s Tim Foley, and our own Cass Everitt and John McDonald appeared on the same panel to explain the high-level concepts available in today’s OpenGL implementations that reduce driver overhead by up to 10x or more”

It’s similar to Mantle’s “9x more draw calls” claims. (actually, pretty much the same thing.)

I wish, though. I prefer OpenGL to DX, and I wish we could just all agree on it as the go-to standard, but the sad truth is, DX has the major dev support.

Mirimon

it even runs Windows faster…

Scali

Better than DirectX 11, yes. But DirectX 12 should deliver similar performance boosts (as should Mantle).

DavidHollinger

It’s entirely possible, however, these OpenGL features are available now (DX12 won’t be available for use for a while) and it’s locks a Dev into 1-2 platforms. One of those (windows 8) is not selling well. This also doesn’t take into account developing for android, iOS, Mac OSX, and other consoles. All is which use something other than DX. Most use openGL. If I’m a developer today, is rather learn to use openGL over DX12 for I’ve simple reason – I can reach the most users with it.

OpenGL has entirely different problems: the API is implemented in the drivers. Just because OpenGL 4.4 has been standardized a few months ago, doesn’t mean all users have it. Afaik neither Intel nor AMD have drivers that support it (which also means you don’t get those CPU-saving extensions).
So you’ll be looking at all sorts of fallback paths for older drivers (on OS X the problem is even bigger: the drivers are built into the OS, and cannot be updated by a user… generally you only get a newer driver and version of OpenGL with an OS update).
No API is perfect.

Chris915

I use Autodesk 3D Studio Max and Direct3D is far better in viewport performance than OpenGL, of course, I use Nitrous over both.

cpuexecution

Directx 12 = Windows 9..hopefully a H.S.A built operating system..Hmm seems like in 2015 we are about to find out if microsoft will still be relevant ..I look to my left theres google,i look to my right theres apple,i look straight ahead theres sony….Also lets not forget steam os…I dunno guys , seems like microsoft has a tough road ahead…so many questions

Matt Menezes

I like how it will be compatible with existing cards.

Previously, when a new DirectX API was released, you’d have to buy a new card to gain support. The fact that this is backwards compatible is awesome and a win for gamers!!

Scali

Nah. Direct3D was usually backward compatible to a certain point. D3D10 is the only exception where you HAD to have a D3D10-capable card. But that was probably because Vista/D3D10 were somewhat rushed and unfinished. D3D11 supports D3D9-hardware again, and the API has hardly changed from D3D10.
D3D9 would run on D3D7-hardware, D3D8 would run on D3D6 hardware, and all earlier versions would work on anything.

Joel Hruska

Well, you say “would run on.” You could run a DX9-capable game on DX6 hardware if there was a DX6-capable rendering path. If the game relied on DX9 for certain visual effects, that didn’t happen.

Hell, I remember when BioShock (the original) only supported cards with SM3 instead of SM2. Locked out an entirely family of Radeon cards from playing.

Scali

No you couldn’t. I specifically said D3D7-hardware, because that’s the minimum requirement for the DX9 API, same for the other examples.
So you COULD write a DX7-capable rendering path. But you cannot write a DX6-capable path, because DX9 will refuse to work on hardware with only DX6-capable drivers.
But that was my point: a new API does not necessarily mean new hardware. The way some games may or may not use an API could mean new hardware… Then again, there are also examples of the opposite: eg, the original Crysis ran on D3D10, which meant you had to have a D3D10-capable card. But they also included a D3D9-renderer, so the game would also run on older hardware.

Anyway, my point was: the D3D API was usually backward-compatible, so it is not all that remarkable that D3D12 is as well.

Starglider

DX should have been optimised a long time ago. Especially with all the intel multi core blurb being pushed at us over the years. Long over due. And thus 1 of the reasons why mantle was created. Still both need a lot of work. I would like to see the Unreal team, Cry engine team, DX team, the Mantel team and nvidia and ati all be sat in 1 room together to make the best they can make and give it to us in 2016. Dynamic core utilisation and new enhancements and features and all optimised to the best of their ability. But that’s never going to happen.

ericore

This would have never happened if not for Mantle, thank you AMD.
Even if your CPU death approaches
Sources say there is someone intelligent at Intel that is allowing for an unlocked Pentium that will burn any AMD cpu, and they also have an 8 core (16 thread) EX cpu on route, and the Broadwell desktop chips are going to ship with iris pro graphics. In one sweep Intel will kill AMD’s troubled CPU business. All the while Nvidia released a graphics chip which is 50% more efficient than theirs’s at gaming.

Joel Hruska

Well, erm, no. That’s not how this works.

Intel is talking up an unlocked Pentium true enough, but Intel is bringing Iris Pro to desktop CPUs in the enthusiast category. That’s $250 – $300. That’s not going to compete with anything AMD is doing in lower price categories.

shadus

I prefer Intel CPUs however AMD isn’t really in trouble, they offer very competitive performance/cost ratio products in the under $200 price range. In multi threaded apps they can keep right up with Intel however their single core performance leaves a lot to be desired plus they Intel has the die size advantage over them. As long as AMD challenges Intel enough so that Intel cant inflate its prices ridiculously high it going to be a great thing for the industry.

Nick M.

In keeping with the site’s persistent hatred toward Xbox One, there is no mention about DX12 also coming to that console. Well played, extremetech.

Mirimon

why would it matter?

is it really coming to xbox one?

why not mention other consoles also capable of using it?

nothing here in the entire time extremetech has had a website has Extremetech ever actually stated “we hate xbox”…..

if you prefer sites with posts that are pro xbox, and their “moderators” and “staff” only ever give xbox glowing press while openly banning and deleting anything pro playstation, might I suggest you visit Polygon?

It’s clear you came here with bias and expected bias….

Joel Hruska

It’s not clear that DX12 will particularly help the Xbox One. If it works like Mantle, Mantle works best when the CPU can’t keep the GPU fed. If that was the case, the Xbox One should be more powerful than the PS4, since its CPU is clocked higher.

Given the performance disparity, I’m not convinced the Xbox One will show any real benefit from DX12.

( )

Right now DX11 places limits on game development. Mantle removes those limits, at least until the next horizon appears years from now. Game development has recognized this and CPU bottlenecks are certainly avoided at the same time there is very little written today that will FULLY benefit NOW from Mantle or it’s rebrand Directx 12. That’s why performance increases are at best modest at the high end. Wait a year when developers realize they can control 100,000 AI objects as opposed to 5000. Those games will change the industry as much as 3d graphics changed the look of gaming.
It’s all about the visual experience. Remember when Myst was first released? That game sold only because of it’s graphic quality, that quality changed the industry. The lesson learned was that quality visuals are essential. The Myst game and story were insipid at best but it was the quality of the visual experience that sold the game and it’s imitators.

( )

DX12 = Mantle. Microsoft is simply rebranding. DX11 required hardware support and it took NVidia a year after DX11 to be fully compatible.

“Microsoft adopts Mantle but calls it DX12

GDC 2014: Completely different because it is not called Mantle, just ask MS PR”

“The company will make its own announcement regarding DX12 later today; we’ll update this post to include that information when available.”

4 days later: Still waiting on that update.

Joel Hruska

DX12 will be available for AMD GCN cards. No support announced for HD 6000 or HD 5000 hardware.,

Assassin LP

WTF

Diego de Souza

thank god, i just bought a GTX 660 (backup PC) and a GTX 770 (main PC) i would be pretty piss if i had to change, those GPUs just for the DX12 !!

Victor Pletea

I wander,where is the real optimisation in directx 12 if we need newer and much powerful gpu’s to fully run it?

Zer01ne

To full use of it ? yes need newer GPU.

Chris915

Awesome. My card (GTX 550 Ti) only supports DirectX 11, not any of the incremental updates to DX11 so far, that I know of.

DxDiag only lists DirectX 11.

So it’s nice to see that DirectX 12 will be backwards compatible with virtually every single GPU from the GTX 400 to the present day.

Zer01ne

Not 100% Compatible.

Chris915

Well, I think one will need to update to Windows 10, as I don’t think DX12 will be released for Windows 8 and older.

However, Nvidia has pledged support for all Fermi, Kepler, and Maxwell (i.e. GeForce GTX 400 series and newer) parts. Intel said the integrated graphics in its existing Haswell processors will also have DX12 support.

Well, we’ll have to see, because they say “work well with,” they don’t really say how much is “well with.”

It might not run the API as well as dedicated DX12 cards. They won’t be DX12 ready, but will be DX12 compatible or whatever they put on cards that support a particular API, but don’t ship with the API out of the box.

Zer01ne

Sure it work well, its just that some things in new card is “Hardware” default that will be software on DX11 Card.

Zer01ne

The HD 5000/6000 use a old Architecture and, AMD have said new api will work only with GCN on AMD Card.

Tempestelterna

cant wait to see what happens! love it!

Przemysław Lib

Mantle is API obviously and not UI.

Also article could use some stats on DX penetration, and upcoming DX12 titles

XH CH

the screenshot is definitely taking from WINDOWS 8 system not Windows 10 cuz DX12 is exclusive to windows 10 so! this post is fake

Joel Hruska

None of the screenshots in this article are fake. Two of them is from GDC 14 when MS and Futuremark demoed DX12.

XH CH

Directx 12 doesnt work on Windows 8

XH CH

& if it work well fuck u MS for not bringing it to users

eonvee375

your last statement is “more correct” ^^

Petrus Laine

It doesn’t work, the Microsoft provided images were captured on early build of Windows 10 which still shared much of the same look with Windows 8 windowing system

Oxide, according to Gordon Mah Ung over at another site, claimed in Ashes of the Singularity the AMD octacores rivaled the high-end consumer Haswell, but I’m still waiting for benches that confirm this.

I’m hoping that we’ll see GPU-side performance improvements from these next-gen APIs as they free us from wasteful GPU-time-consuming hacks like deferred rendering. Async Compute FTW.

Petrus Laine

Unlike the article claims, Fermi and Kepler only support Feature Level 11_0, not 11_1, which is supported by GCN 1.0.
(Also, in case of Fermi it’s still theoretical, NVIDIA hasn’t been able to pull up a driver with DX12 API support for Fermi)

I am not sure if it is a problem with dx12 or not. I have two laptops one with 4th gen i3 + 4GB DDR3 RAM + 2GB NVIDIA Geforce 820M and other with AMD A-10 7300 + 8GB RAM+1GB R6(integrated)+2GB R7(dedicated). Windows 7 was installed in my i3 powered laptop a year ago and games like PES2015, Far cry 4 were running fine. Then I bought this amd a10 powered machine and installed windows 10 but I was surprised to see PES 2015 show some lagging during game play what I know is that for gaming this configuration has to be more suitable than my i3 powered laptop. I started having this strange feeling of dx12 has something to do with it, so I installed win10 at my i3 powered laptop and I felt like I am right because now the i3 powered laptop also lags while playing PES2015. I will now try to play PES2015 at my AMD A-10 powered machine after installing win7 on it and see what happens.

mtray

after a month..

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2016 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.